Catherine Murphy (Kildare North, Social Democrats) | Oireachtas source

I will share time with Deputies Eamon Ryan and Seamus Healy.

The main purpose of the Bill is to improve safety on our roads, which is something everyone, not only in the House but generally, wants to see. There are ways this can be done. One thing we cannot do is pay lipservice or give the impression that something is being done or that it is more limited than people will expect when legislation such as this is passed. We must consider the practical application of the law as well as law itself.

If one has a view on drink driving, one must have a view on drug driving because it is about impairment and putting people at risk. It is right that we legislate for it. I note a number of drugs are listed in the legislation, including cannabis, cocaine and heroin. There is an exemption for people with prescriptions for medical cannabis. While the initiative is very welcome, a myriad of other substances exist, such as crystal meth, and I ask the Minister whether the device being purchased to detect these drugs will be suitable for testing other types of drugs or is it specific to the drugs listed? Will it capable of detecting other drugs if they are added to the list? How will other drugs be added?

I have concerns about the practicality of enforcing the law at a time when there is much concern about budgets for the Garda.

The explanatory memorandum, for example, states the devices to test for the presence of drugs are significantly more expensive than those used to test for alcohol. It cost 16 cent to test for alcohol but it costs €15 to test for drugs.

Only 150 of these units will be deployed. What is the methodology for rolling them out? There is a drugs problem in every part of the country and it is worse in some places than others. Will enforcement be carried out exclusively in some areas with no enforcement in others? What is the strategy behind this? Will the Garda be given an increased allocation in the budget to purchase more of these units and to expand enforcement? While I wholeheartedly believe this should be done, cost appears to be a factor in rolling out this measure. The Government could give the impression that something is being done while the reality is that significantly less will be done in practice than people expect.

The practicality of enforcement of the 20 km/h speed limit will be a big issue. The legislation offers local authorities the opportunity to introduce this speed limit on housing estates, if they so wish. I spent years on a local authority and there will be huge demand to have this included in by-laws. By-laws will also have to be amended and there will be a great deal of red tape in addition to erecting signs. However, when it comes down to it, enforcement will be the big issue. The perception will be that local authorities have a responsibility to enforce the speed limit but the Garda traffic corps will be the ones who will be responsible and this will add to their workload. There will be high demand and high expectation and people will be disappointed when enforcement falls short. While I understand the origin of the speed limit and the motivation behind its introduction, more work needs to be done. This speed limit has to be effective in practice and not in theory if it is to mean something.

The size of the Garda traffic corps has been reduced in recent years and with road fatalities increasing, there is potential to stretch its resources thinner. Was a regulatory impact assessment carried out into the additional resources that will be required? Is the Government up for providing them?

I am a fan of self-enforcement and design changes on housing estates. Estates can be designed in such a way as to make it difficult for motorists to drive at speed. Older estates have not benefitted from this but, for example, self-enforcing measures such as traffic calming could be used. This is not necessarily about ramps; chicanes and planting could be used. That needs to be encouraged and greater investment is needed to reduce road speeds. The greatest offenders in respect of driving through estates at speed are the residents themselves in most cases.

I have had concerns about the deployment of the Garda traffic corps and GATSO vans for a long time. Given the limited resources available, they must be put to the best use. GATSO vans are supposed to be deployed at accident blackspots. The RSA plots on a map each fatality and serious injury resulting in someone being taken to hospital. Significant information is, therefore, available regarding accident blackspots. Injuries and fatalities are well documented. The safest roads are segregated, for example, dual carriageways. The Naas Road has three lanes on both sides with a hard shoulder yet GATSO vans are frequently deployed along it. Some years ago, I conducted an analysis. I obtained documentation but I cannot remember the source. All the speeding fines were listed by road. I spent several days going through it because I wondered was it my imagination or were GATSO vans being inappropriately deployed. Some of the safest roads had the highest numbers of fines. I made the point at the time that this was like shooting fish in a barrel and that this was an income generation rather than a road safety exercise. The Garda maintains the reason these roads are safe is the high level of enforcement but I would encourage the RSA to repeat this exercise and to examine hotspots, for example, where more than 100 speeding fines are issued. These hotspots should be matched against accident rates. Are limited road safety resources being deployed inappropriately? The maximum return is being generated in income but not in road safety terms. The RSA would be the appropriate body to examine this.

The enforcement of the 20 km/h speed limit has the potential to create a significant new demand on local authorities. It is not a question of just putting signs up. They have to undertake a detailed process to make or amend by-laws in order that the speed limit will be legally enforceable and motorists can be fined. There could be huge disappointment regarding enforcement. A commitment has to be made to enforcement in addition to providing money.

See this speech in context